I thought that I’d led off with the scarier of the two trailers I planned to post today (you know, for Halloween) when I wrote about 11-11-11. But shame on me for assuming that a film starring the one and only Harry Potter couldn’t possibly be that frightening. I hadn’t watched The Woman in Black‘s trailer until a few minutes ago, and now I’m cursing myself because I’m going to go to bed pretty soon and am doomed to have a bunch of FREAKY LITTLE KIDS floating around in my mind’s eye. And you guys know how I hate nothing more than movies with freaky little kids (FLKs? Should I claim ownership of this acronym?). I’m also now adding Freaky Kids’ Toys to my list of things I’d love to see absent from the silver screen for the rest of eternity. You’ll understand why after you watch the preview for yourself:

This first poster for the film captures what I thought to be the scariest moment in the trailer—a ghostly face appearing behind Har—sorry, Daniel’s in the window:

This next one… well, I wouldn’t have even needed to see the trailer in order to be disturbed by its scratched-out-eyes image:

WHAT THE… AAAAAHhhhhh!!! I’m so, so bitter I had to take in all of this stuff before hitting the hay. I hope you guys appreciate it!

The Woman in Black, which opens February 3, is based on the ’83 novel of the same name by Susan Hill. The book was also turned into a stage production in 1989—a production that was so immensely successful that it’s still running! Take that, Cats! In the UK there were also a few radio adaptations of the story, as well as a made-for-TV movie. So clearly the source material is something a heck of a lot of people are drawn to… now it’s just a matter of whether director James Watkins is going to be able to recreate that magic in his version. And don’t get me wrong—I do think what we’ve seen so far looks well done, it’s just not for me. Freaky Little Kids ARE NOT FOR ME!

But what about you? Are you curious about The Woman in Black? Do you think it’s a wiseHarry Potter follow-up for Daniel Radcliffe?